Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth

BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:32 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,

BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:09 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2008 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:
How well protected from a nuclear surface blast is a submarine hiding
under 3~4 meters worth of the Arctic polar ice cap?
How long is a piece of string?

As long as you'd care to make it, such as nearly from our moon to
Earth is technically doable, and of otherwise almost unlimited if
deployed out past the moon's L2.


OOPS! taboo/nondisclosure (aka need to know)
The answer is, not at all. At least not by the ice.
I suppose a 100 megaton would cause such ice to move and otherwise
vaporise, although that in of itself takes away a great deal of
energy. Say if given a one km radius of 3 meter thick ice is 2.355e6
m3 of such ice that needs to get displaced and/or melted. (more likely
a 10 km radius = 230e6 tonnes of ice)
Seems likely that amount of ice would moderate that kind of nuclear
blast energy in more ways than just thermal energy, because as a
physical blast or shockwave shield itself is going to take quite a bit
of that kinetic energy away too.
So, your "not at all" is perhaps yet another one of those special
conditional laws of physics in order to suit your interpretation
that'll benefit your side of this rant.
Again, you're just talking in adjectives. You've thrown in a few numbers
here and there so it looks scientific, but you haven't shown your math.
So your explanation is rejected.

Besides, there's no evidence that anyone ever detonated such a warhead
in the Antarctic, so the question is moot.

Are you suggesting that our government has no secrets and tells no
lies?

That's OK because, you would knowingly reject your own mother if you
ever realized what unusual orifice you'd emerged out of.
. - Brad Guth

lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity.

first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is
negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative
energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely
from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular.

that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real
terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar
speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular.
a. a moon would escape from the earth
b a planet would escape from the sun.

any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would
exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they
would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in
"Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading
If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra.

thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff.

josephus
--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter,
"Everybody is ignorant but on
different subjects"
--Will Rogers
Its not what you know
that gets you in trouble
its what you know that ain so.
--josh billings.

BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation
"[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average."
584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months

venus, mercury, Jupiter Saturn and lots of moons have small integer
relations. it occurs everywhere. AE Roy talked about this. the real
question is "Does this fact have anything to do with orbital stability?"

I remember a simulation at JPL had a problem. I heard about it from
one of the developers. the simulation was a stepwise emulation of the
Solar System. well, some programmer made a mistake and when they ran
the simulation the EARTH was missing. Venus and Mercury became
unstable and Venus escaped the solar system. rather clear evidence that
the hierarchy is particular and specific to stability.


However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of
some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown."

That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument.

The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth.

What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of
an icy proto-moon (be it complex)?
You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible.
Yes I have,
Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been
disputed.


lithobreaking is like antigravity and shares properties with it. it
requires a mechanism the stop the inertia of an entire PLANET.

F= GM*V^2
that is the energy to decellerate the earth. that decelleration would
violently alter our orbit ( 1.4121* V is the definition of EXCESS
HYPERBOLIC VELOCITY.
Only within your totally subjective=objective mindset that's manic
bipolar into accepting absolutely anything via your government or from
their DARPA/NASA as the one and only word of your white Semitic
God(s).

but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of
being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye-
candy mode.
They have also simulated what would happen if dinosaurs were recreated
and ran amuck on a tropical island. It proves nothing.

It goes a long ways towards proving as to what's reasonably possible,
and of what isn't.

While you're at it; do tell us where that terrific arctic ocean basin
came from?
How about telling us when Earth got the vast majority of its seasonal
tilt?
The planets of the solar system vary widely in their range of axial
tilts. There is nothing especially unusual about Earth's.
Other than indications that before having our moon there existed a
nearly monoseason environment, because there was only a small amount
of seasonal tilt, although having a somewhat greater elliptical orbit
and roughly a third the ocean tidal action taking place would have
made the tropics quite survivable by us humans, regardless of how much
polar ice expanded.
But you've presented no evidence that any of this happened, and you've
ignored other evidence that contradicts it.

Yes I have, and no I have not. Terribly sorry about that.
. - Brad Guth


--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter,
"Everybody is ignorant but on
different subjects"
--Will Rogers
Its not what you know
that gets you in trouble
its what you know that ain so.
--josh billings.

wrote:
On May 25, 12:25�pm, BradGuth wrote:

As of prior to 12,500 BP, the best available science thus far tells us
there were no apparent human or animal migrations pertaining to

How the "F" can anyone know what occured 12,500 without robust,
reliable, detailed records being made and kept safe for 12,500
years ??! What "F"ing best available science are you referring to ??!
None exists! Grow up little dreamer.

You appear fairly educated and somewhat bright here and there, yet you
subtract this notion with a single paragraph.

Then perhaps your forever closed mindset and faith-based nayism
shouldn't bother trying to deductively figure anything out for your
self.

I mean, why bother when the mostly subjective science of your
mainstream status quo box is always Old Testament or Qur'an like, more
than good enough? (even when 2+2 doesn’t equal 4)

Tell us why didn't you hold your DARPA/NASA and of their Apollo fiasco
to those same standards that you insist all others must provide?

God forbid, apparently you wouldn't ever want to police your own
kind.
. - Brad Guth

BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote:
On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote:







On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote:
On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote:
On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote:
No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from
such an impact.
Absolutely, but what ice?
Where's all that ice today?
Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here
you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the
very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is
telling the truth, or even the half truth.
Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off
those simulations?
. - Brad Guth
No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came
from and where it went. Evasion noted.
Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or
rather DARPA damage-control noted.
When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark
Side) ever learn?
Productive responses. Not.


BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those
icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the
realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy?
. - Brad Guth
Evasion still noted.

? evasion ?

Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy?

Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy?

How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy?

Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there?
. - Brad Guth

most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane.

josephus
--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter,
"Everybody is ignorant but on
different subjects"
--Will Rogers
Its not what you know
that gets you in trouble
its what you know that ain so.
--josh billings.

On May 26, 12:42 am, josephus wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote:
On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote:

On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote:
On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote:
On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote:
No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from
such an impact.
Absolutely, but what ice?
Where's all that ice today?
Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here
you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the
very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is
telling the truth, or even the half truth.
Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off
those simulations?
. - Brad Guth
No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came
from and where it went. Evasion noted.
Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or
rather DARPA damage-control noted.
When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark
Side) ever learn?
Productive responses. Not.

BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those
icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the
realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy?
. - Brad Guth
Evasion still noted.

? evasion ?

Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy?

Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy?

How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy?

Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there?
. - Brad Guth

most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane.

josephus
--

Gee whiz, then that goes exactly along with my other argument about
how next to impossible it is for plain old ice to exist/coexist in the
vacuum and cosmic gauntlet of space, that is unless having a
sufficient mass and way the hell and gone out there (such as Pluto and
Sedna should contain such ice, along with their frozen methane and CO2
dry-ice).

Of course, it there were a sufficient rocky core of 7.35e22 kg to
start off with, as then the associated gravity would tend to hold onto
whatever ice, be it of methane, dry-ice or plain old water-ice, as
well as for whatever local geothermal energy causing internal gas/
vapors to emerge could also be held onto, and as long as it stayed far
enough away from a given star or whatever large planet would also be
essential for holding onto an atmosphere that would shield and/or
insulate that icy surface, and obviously better yet if there was a
magnetosphere for giving that thin atmosphere some protection from
whatever solar wind.

Perhaps the paramagnetic characteristics of our moon could have helped
a little, if not via an active core that once upon a time having
sustained just enough of a magnetosphere to have shielded itself, as
of prior to merging along with Earth.
.. - Brad Guth

On May 25, 3:27 pm, josephus wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation
"[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average."
584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months

venus, mercury, Jupiter Saturn and lots of moons have small integer
relations. it occurs everywhere. AE Roy talked about this. the real
question is "Does this fact have anything to do with orbital stability?"

I remember a simulation at JPL had a problem. I heard about it from
one of the developers. the simulation was a stepwise emulation of the
Solar System. well, some programmer made a mistake and when they ran
the simulation the EARTH was missing. Venus and Mercury became
unstable and Venus escaped the solar system. rather clear evidence that
the hierarchy is particular and specific to stability.



However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of
some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown."

That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument.

The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth.

What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of
an icy proto-moon (be it complex)?
You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible.
Yes I have,
Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been
disputed.

lithobreaking is like antigravity and shares properties with it. it
requires a mechanism the stop the inertia of an entire PLANET.

F= GM*V^2
that is the energy to decellerate the earth. that decelleration would
violently alter our orbit ( 1.4121* V is the definition of EXCESS
HYPERBOLIC VELOCITY.

Then you have not run the basic moon impacting Earth simulations that
clearly proves otherwise. How sad.

This is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you ever run the
basic online crater simulator?
http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/
. - Brad Guth

On May 25, 2:43 pm, josephus wrote:

lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity.

first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is
negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative
energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely
from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular.

that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real
terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar
speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular.
a. a moon would escape from the earth
b a planet would escape from the sun.

any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would
exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they
would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in
"Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading
If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra.

thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff.

josephus

Why is josephus having to talk as though less than child?

Are you Muslim, and thus deathly afraid of using computers, or
cameras?

In addition to your having ignored the Sirius star/solar system recent
loss of 4+ solar mass, and having further ignored the stellar binary
considerations that would become trinary once our solar system was
close enough. So, where’s that supercomputer simulation?

Apparently you have not even bothered to run the basic of moon
impacting Earth simulations that clearly proves otherwise. How sad
and pathetic at the same time.

This limited method is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you
ever run the basic online crater simulator? (apparently not)
http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/
. - Brad Guth

On Sun, 25 May 2008 12:25:42 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 25, 10:22 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:32:23 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth

wrote:
Venus as it passes extremely close by every 19 months, as such is
nearly as moon like tidal locked to Earth.

What's your basis for this claim?

Direct observational or observationology (other than the visible
spectrum) via radar imaging that tells us exactly which way a given
face of Venus is facing Earth.

No, tell me where I can look it up. I'm not just going to take your
word for it. Oh, by the way, why does it matter?

Good grief; just do a basic search for three little words; Earth
Venus lock, and lo and behold it should be somewhat near the top of
the stack of such topics and numerous web pages that have posted this
peer replicated knowledge for more than the past decade.

Why does it matter?



What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of
an icy proto-moon (be it complex)?

You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible.

Yes I have,

No, you really haven't.

The introduction to this topic was not about Earth always having that
moon, or was that part simply not clear enough?

Do you think that sentence makes sense?




but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of
being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye-
candy mode.

Why would anyone bother to do the simulation without some reason to
think that it is possible?

Why would anyone bother to climb mount Everest,

Because they know it's there. If they didn't have reason to think it
was there, they'd be idiots to try to climb mount Everest.

or try to fly like a
bird

Anyone who tries to fly like a bird is an eccentric hobbyist at best.
Anyone who seriously thinks it's possible is a nutjob. Airplanes and
hang gliders do not fly like birds.

On May 26, 10:14 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 12:25:42 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth



wrote:
On May 25, 10:22 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:32:23 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth

wrote:
Venus as it passes extremely close by every 19 months, as such is
nearly as moon like tidal locked to Earth.

What's your basis for this claim?

Direct observational or observationology (other than the visible
spectrum) via radar imaging that tells us exactly which way a given
face of Venus is facing Earth.

No, tell me where I can look it up. I'm not just going to take your
word for it. Oh, by the way, why does it matter?

Good grief; just do a basic search for three little words; Earth
Venus lock, and lo and behold it should be somewhat near the top of
the stack of such topics and numerous web pages that have posted this
peer replicated knowledge for more than the past decade.

Why does it matter?

Obviously uncovering the best available truth didn't matter to Hitler,
his Zionist/Nazi minions and puppet-masters, or that of our resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush), so by all means you coud be 100% correct.


What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of
an icy proto-moon (be it complex)?

You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible.

Yes I have,

No, you really haven't.

The introduction to this topic was not about Earth always having that
moon, or was that part simply not clear enough?

Do you think that sentence makes sense?

Yes I do. What the hell was your interpretation of this topic intro?


but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of
being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye-
candy mode.

Why would anyone bother to do the simulation without some reason to
think that it is possible?

Why would anyone bother to climb mount Everest,

Because they know it's there. If they didn't have reason to think it
was there, they'd be idiots to try to climb mount Everest.

or try to fly like a

bird

Anyone who tries to fly like a bird is an eccentric hobbyist at best.
Anyone who seriously thinks it's possible is a nutjob. Airplanes and
hang gliders do not fly like birds.

BTW; You've avoided and/or excluded the swim like a whale part.

Silly boy, are we being just a wee bit overly Zionist or perhaps of
something far worse these days? You know damn good and well what I'd
intended by my question. But then you're clearly one of the DARPA bad
guys that's in favor of furthering your faith-based and warlord
formulated New World Order on behalf of global domination at all cost
and w/o remorse for even those of your own kind. Just like in the
good old day of treating that pesky ringworm disorder with your 36,000
fold dosage of gamma and X-rays is what curred them dark-skinned
Jews. Why don't you tell us how a ringworm even knew the difference
between a dark or white Jew.
.. - Brad Guth

BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 2:43 pm, josephus wrote:
lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity.

first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is
negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative
energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely
from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular.

that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real
terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar
speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular.
a. a moon would escape from the earth
b a planet would escape from the sun.

any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would
exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they
would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in
"Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading
If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra.

thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff.

josephus

Why is josephus having to talk as though less than child?

Are you Muslim, and thus deathly afraid of using computers, or
cameras?

In addition to your having ignored the Sirius star/solar system recent
loss of 4+ solar mass, and having further ignored the stellar binary
considerations that would become trinary once our solar system was
close enough. So, where’s that supercomputer simulation?


4+ solar mass loss? did you just make that up. please show us a
reference to a news release or even, god forbid, a juried magazine.
otherwise this is just an unsupported assertion by imagination.

Apparently you have not even bothered to run the basic of moon
impacting Earth simulations that clearly proves otherwise. How sad
and pathetic at the same time.

why dont you look up celestial mechanics and orbital motions

This limited method is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you
ever run the basic online crater simulator? (apparently not)
http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/
. - Brad Guth


josephus
-- It is true that the person making the claim should show the
proof that is approved by the opposition. brad the clueless tries to
pass the research of to the opposition. and that is not how science is
done.

--
I go sailing in the summer
and look at stars in the winter,
"Everybody is ignorant but on
different subjects"
--Will Rogers
Its not what you know
that gets you in trouble
its what you know that ain so.
--josh billings.